A Matrix Model Black Hole

CERN-TH.6916/93

A Matrix-Model Black Hole

Ulf H. Danielsson
Theory Division, CERN, CH-1211 Geneva 23, Switzerland.

Abstract

In this paper the c = 1 matrix model deformed by a l/i 2 piece is discussed.
Tachyon correlation functions are calculated up to genus two using methods
similar to those for the undeformed case. The possible connection with the
two dimensional black hole is also considered. In particular, restrictions on
naked singularities imposed by the matrix model are found.

CERN-TH.6916/93
June 1993

1 Introduction

It has turned out to be remarkably difficult to find a matrix model describing
the two dimensional black hole. The reason is our poor understanding of the
target space physics in the standard c = 1 matrix model, thought to describe
the linear dilaton vacuum. If we had such a model, we could address the
many questions raised by the study of two dimensional black holes using
field theory [Q. There, severe ambiguities were discovered which have made
progress difficult, see e.g. |3| for reviews. String theory in the form of
matrix models might possibly suggest some answers.

There is already a string theoretic black hole, the one of ||. It has
been solved to all orders in a' on the sphere. Higher genus, however, is
very complicated to handle in this field theory approach. A matrix model
method, if it existed, would be much preferable. The genus expansion is also
an expansion in h and therefore essential for understanding the quantum
black hole.

A lot of the confusion in the field has been due to an incorrect identifica-
tion of the Liouville mode in the matrix model. It was tempting to identify
the time-of-flight variable in the inverted potential as the Liouville mode.
This is natural from the point of view of collective field theory, but not true,
even approximately. In fact, as was shown in |5|, ||, the true identification
is through the loop operator by an integral transform. This gives an explicit
construction of the Wheeler-de-Witt equation, which coincides with the mini
super space Wheeler-de-Witt equation obtained from field theory.

There has been several attempts to derive matrix model black holes by
working with spatial coordinates simply related to the time of flight |7|, §].
In this connection the 1/x 2 potential has been proposed as a candidate for
describing a black hole. Tachyon equations of motion have been obtained,
which look like the correct ones for a black hole. This has been the basis of
the identification. However, in two dimensions, coordinate transformations
make it possible to remove any trace of the metric from the wave equation. In
fact, this is achieved by using precisely the time-of-flight coordinate. Clearly
there is no information about the black hole in the wave equation unless it
is supplemented by information about the gauge or equivalently about the
dilaton. This makes this line of approach difficult.

Others have tried to make only a field transform, without any change of
the underlying matrix model || [TOfl . This, typically, suggests that the cos-

1

mo logical constant should be identified as the black- hole mass. This cannot,
however, lead to the correct scaling, as we will see.

In [|TI[] it was suggested that one needs to have both a new matrix model,
modified by a 1/x 2 piece, and a field transformation. In such a way the
authors were able to show that the resulting model has a set of desirable
properties, not shared by above attempts. In this paper I will examine the
modified matrix model further. I will use standard c = 1 matrix-model tools
to redo some calculations in the modified model. These results should be
useful in the further study of this model, which might be the long searched
for matrix model black hole.

2 A Modified Matrix Model

In c = 1 string theory, there exists an infinite set of special (or discrete)
states apart from the tachyon, the only field degree of freedom. These states
can be excited by operators, which are constructed, in the matrix model, by
the eigenvalue coordinate x and its conjugate momentum p. They all have
counterparts in field theory, as discussed in |12|, [13|, [13]. The field theory
special states fall into two subsets, the Seiberg (S) and anti-Seiberg (AS),
[ p~5| , |T6|j . An example of an AS operator is the operator that deforms the

flat dilaton vacuum into a black hole, JT7|. The matrix model special states

correspond to the S states, and their identification is fairly well understood.
So far, however, the issue of the AS states in the matrix model has been very
confusing. For some possible clues see [[18] .

The operators all have their particular gravitational scaling. This is an
important clue for the correct identification. Can we find an object in the
matrix model with the same scaling as the black-hole operator discussed
above? Indeed we can: the simplest choice is 1/x 2 . What is remarkable
with this potential, a property that it shares with the pure x 2 , is that it is
exactly soluble. Even in this modified potential the energy levels are equally
spaced (if the x 2 is continued to the right-side-up version, see figure 1). This
is a property not shared by a generic potential. As discussed in fll3f , it is
the resonances in the continued potential that give rise to the spectrum of
special states. Therefore, the equal spacing is an important property of the
potential if it is to be a candidate for the black hole.

One must also verify that the correct scaling is obtained. In particular

2

we would like anomalous logarithms. These indicate that we have an extra
spatial dimension. Again this is a property not shared by many potentials,
see [OJ. But, as explained in [IT|, with 1/x 2 , it works. To understand how,
take a look at figure 2. The Fermi sea is supposed to reach precisely to the
top of the undeformed — x 2 part of the potential. The critical point, then,
is approached as the r]/x 2 deformation is removed, i.e. 77 — > 0. The double
scaling limit is obtained by keeping the string coupling constant l/(/5r] 1 / 2 )
fixed. (3 is 1/h and goes to infinity in this limit. Throughout the paper all
/3's will be absorbed into rj when appropriate.

3 Wave Functions

In this section I will solve the Schrodinger equation for the modified potential.
The equation is

I will, as in [13|, [14]], make the continuation a' — *> —a' } figure 1, and solve

//"-!- \ -x 2 + e- J

y =

instead; x has been rescaled and e = 2i(a') 1 l 2 E. With

2 V = a 2 - (-l) n a

one finds the energy levels

e n = 2n + 1 + 2a.

The normalized wave functions are

1

A;!i> + i + A;)

H^(x)\x\ a e-^

for n = 2k even and

1/2 ±J -2k

HtlAx)\x\ a e-^

k\T(a+'l + k)

(2)

(3)

(4)

(5)

(6)

3

for n = 2k + 1 odd. The polynomials H^f 1 are modifications of the Hermite
polynomials that are recovered at a = 0. They can be written in terms of
degenerate hypergeometric functions

H%(x) = (-l) k (a + \) k 1 F 1 (-k; a + I x 2 ) (7)

for n = 2k even and

H$ +l {x) = (-l) k (a + \) k x 1 F 1 (-k; a + | x 2 ) (8)

for n = 2k + 1 odd. (x)k = x(x + l)...(x + k — 1) is the Pochhammer symbol.
The modified Hermite polynomials obey a recursion relation

H% = xHP - X n H^, (9)

where

A n = { a „ + f 71 • (10)

\ f n even v '

Because of (Q), the value of a will be different for odd and even n. An
appropriate r\ = limit gives

(11)

for n odd and the negative of this for n even. This means that the set of wave
functions (|5]||) is doubled. One for each sign of a. There are also different
recursion relations for the different signs. The physical wave functions are
just half of these, the odd ones of the positive-sign set and the even ones of
the negative-sign set (if 77 > 0). The unphysical wave functions are still of
importance as intermediate steps in the recursion relations.

An important tool for the study of the harmonic oscillator is the step up
and down operators which connects different energy levels. Its existence is
a consequence of the equal spacing of the energy levels. Since the situation
is similar here, we might expect the existence of such operators here as well.
However, the equal spacing refers to the even and odd levels separately only.
Therefore we may only construct operators that take two steps at a time.
The operators are

b= 1 -(tp + x) 2 -^ (12)

4

its conjugate and the hamiltonian

H

{p 2 + x 2 )

+

(13)

They obey

6, 6 f

[IT, 6]

-26 and

H,tf] = 26 f .

(14)

The algebra is the same as the one of a 2 , a) 2 , and H in the case of the
harmonic oscillator. There also exist operators ± —

which connect the

even and odd states. They differ from the 6's and b^s in the sense that if
you act on an arbitrary energy eigenstate, you will obtain a new eigenstate
only in half of the cases.

It is the harmonic oscillator algebra in the undeformed model that lies
behind the structure in the matrix model. Since a is expected also
in the black hole case, see e.g. [ 20 1 , it is a necessary requirement of the

modified model that it exhibits a similar structure, as indeed it does.

Since the potential is singular we must be careful and check if the wave
functions we use are normalizable. I said above that the expressions ([5]) and
(|(|) were of unit norm. More precisely, they are of unit norm or not normal-
izable at all. The wave functions that are in danger of being unnormalizable
are the even ones. In fact, when 2rj > | they all blow up worse than 1/y/x
at x = 0, are therefore not normalizable and hence must be discarded. This
is a very desirable property. In fact, according to [II, 2T|, the poles of the
tachyon correlation functions in the black hole have a spacing that is twice
as large as the one in the flat dilaton theory. In units where a' = 1 they
occur only at even integer momenta rather than at all integer momenta. The
matrix model explains this in a neat way in the weak coupling regime (77
large and positive) by throwing out the even states. The poles are due to
transitions between states in the continued oscillator fll3"l , which will then
have twice the spacing.

When — 7 < 2r] < |, i.e. at strong coupling, all wave functions are
normalizable and we have a choice of which ones to keep. Let us consider
this in more detail. Owing to the singular potential it is reasonable to try
to limit the theory to just one side of the singular point. Nothing is allowed
to pass through it. To keep just the odd wave functions is a way to do this

5

family of different ways to do this, i.e. different self-adjoint extensions [22

dx 2

These are determined by the requirement that the kinetic operator, must

consistently. In the case of strong coupling, however, there is a one-parameter
family of different W£
These are determined
be self-adjoint. From

i

dx 2 J dx

,,d 2 ^ ro d 2 ^ ,
f tt = / +

(15)

x=0

it follows that

' .dip d^ N

Y ~~j -j- W

0. (16)

x=0

Not all wave functions obey this requirement, but those built on a basis
consisting of

-„ -sL ^ i e a 1 1 2

ip r ,e~rx a e 2 1 F 1 (---- + -;-a + -;x 2 )

+ ** 1 e-* ^(-l + l + ^a+^x 2 ) (17)

do; r is a free parameter (independent of e) labelling the self-adjoint ex-
tension. It is easy to check that any complex linear combination of wave
functions ( |17D with different energies e obeys (0). Note that I have not
fixed the energy levels e yet. From flTT] ) one recognizes a combination of (^)
and (|6|). The energy levels are determined by requiring the wave functions
to vanish asymptotically. This leads to the following condition

-a + |) r(a + |;

a _i_ 1\ € I a I 3 >

(18)

At r = we recover the odd wave functions and their equally-spaced energy
levels. At general r, things are much more complicated and the energy levels

are no longer equally spaced. In [|TTJ it is proposed that i] < correspond to
a negative mass, and hence naked, singularity. The strong coupling ambigu-
ity we have discussed is relevant for both strongly coupled black holes and
strongly coupled naked singularities.

The case of a weakly coupled naked singularity is however very differ-
ent. When 2r] < — -r the energy eigenvalues turn complex, which signals an
instability where everything rushes into the infinite — 1/x 2 potential well.

6

Instead of using the terms weak and strong coupling, one might talk about
large- and small-mass black holes. It then follows that the ambiguity exists
for small mass black holes, or naked singularities of small negative mass.
Furthermore, naked singularities of large negative mass are not allowed. This
behaviour of the matrix model in the presence of a naked singularity, if the
interpretation of 11] is correct, is very interesting and might have important
consequences.

In the following I will keep only the odd wave functions and concentrate
on the weak-coupling, positive-mass, black hole.

4 The Puncture Two-Point Function

The first object I will calculate is the two-puncture correlation function.
This is an elementary exercise. A puncture is a zero-momentum tachyon,
which may be inserted by taking a derivative with respect to the cosmological

constant. The two-point correlation function is given by p3

1 00 1

<PP) = --9£__. (19)
In our case, fi = and the sum should be only over odd n, i.e.

^ E Z^T-l, (20)

2?r m + 5 + 2

where z = \ + a = y2rj + |. Now use

CO 1 OO 1

E 1 1 = 4>(x + y) = £<>(*) h %y + E ^»0»0(-i) B — (21)

^ n + x + y ^ ny n

where B n (x) are the Bernoulli polynomials. The sum is not convergent, but
can be defined by taking a y derivative and throwing away terms analytic in
y. The result is

(PP) = ~ ^0(1/2)108^-^^(1/2)^ . (22)

7

I have used that B k (l/2) = -(l-2 1 - k )B k = for odd k to get rid of the odd
powers. The Bernoulli numbers B k are zero for all odd k except k — 1. The
expansion in terms of z is, apart from an alternating sign, identical to the
one of l//z 2 in the unmodified potential. However, the above expression must
be reexpanded in l/r/, which is the string coupling squared. Up to genus two
the result is

'a' L 1/2 7 167 \

% g 77 1/2 + — -—— + ... (23)

2tt V ° ' 48?7 3840r/ 2

compared to

7T V 24(Va» 2 960(Va , /i)"

for the undeformed case.

(24)

5 Tachyon Correlation Functions

In this section I will calculate some correlation functions at non-zero mo-
mentum, culminating in expressions for tachyon correlation functions up to
genus two.

We first need the recursion relations (|9]) expressed in terms of normalized
wave functions. They are

for n odd and

[ — ] \n + l} = x\n) - l^- + aj \n - 1)

fn + l \ 1/2 , , , fn\ l l 2 .

\-^— + a ) + =x\n) - ( -j \n-l)

(25)

(26)

for n even. Note that it is only those \m) where m is odd that are physical.

With the help of these recursion relations, it is simple to derive many
matrix elements. For instance

{n\x 2k \n + 2k)

,n ,n + 1, 1 1/2

K - + a + l)fc(— g— )k

(27)

8

Correlation functions of x 2k will have poles for a set of different momenta,
13|] for the undeformed case. The highest-momentum pole is due to the

sec

tachyon piece of x 2k . In terms of the operators b and we have

- 2k - 2 k ~ 1 (b k + & tfe ) + ... (28)

x

To calculate two-point tachyon correlation functions we therefore only need
the matrix element (|27|). The starting point is

(PP0 1 2 )

l c . ^ (7i|Q 1 |m)(m|0 2 |n) 2(g,

(29)

which was derived in |L3[ using perturbation theory. For comparison I will
first do the calculation for the undeformed model. Calculations using a sim-
ilar method have been done in [14 , and in particular in [|l]|] up to genus
seven. In this case we find

)-2fe+l

< PT P T P >--

71

(n + r

2k

4k

(30)

The sum is defined by taking enough derivatives with respect to fi in order for
it to be convergent. Analytic terms are then skipped. With this prescription
it follows that

E

n

1 + 2i\fd \i

o 2n + 1 + 2i\Za' ' \i

E

i

o 2n + 1 + 2iya'n

(31)

The difference in the numerator of (|30D can be expanded in large n and /i
(this will eventually give the genus expansion) using Stirling numbers of the
first kind. They are defined by

{x)-n — E ^n™'

x

(32)

m=0

where the first few Stirling numbers are

9

c{n) _ i o(n-l)

n
2

o(n-2)

n
3

3n - 1
4 '

o(n-3) _ _ n
4

n(n-l) {n _ 4)
2 ' "

7i \ 15n 3 - 30n 2 + 5n + 2
5 ) 48

and Si n ~ 5) = -

n \ n{n- l)(3n 2 -7n-2)
6 j 16

(33)

The first two are given in JS], while the others can be calculated from rela-
tions given in

24]1. The numerator is then

2fc

(m+1)

(m)

2fc+l V 1) ^fc

m=0

n .

(34)

With the help of fl3"ID and (|33|) the correlation function up to genus two can
be shown to be

W2

-2fc+5

-/,-

7T

1

Wfif k - 1 - — {2k - l){k - l)(4fc 2 -2k- l)(V^^) 2k - 3

(2k l){k l)(2k 3)(fc - 2) (4gfe4 _ 8Qfe3 _ 2Qfe2 + ^ + 7)( ^ )2 fc-6

1440

log//

P

2 4fc 2 '

(35)

The calculation is quite tedious for higher genus. Mathematica is recom-
mended from genus two. As discussed in [13], [L3J this should be interpreted

as

)-2fc+2

7T

"P

^ 1 -^(P-1)(P-2)(P 2 -P-1K- 3

(p-l)(p-2)(p-3){p-A) {3p , _ 1Qp3 _ ^ + ^ + 6

5760

log//

"V-4fc 2 (36)

in agreement with 0] for a' = 1. The pole factor is the leading part of the
gamma function external legs.

10

Let me repeat the calculation, now for the deformed model at fi = 0. We
then have

(PPT P T P )

Ay/a'

71

E

m=0

(m + 1 + z) k (m + l) k - (m + z)_ fe (m)_ fc

(2m + 1 + z) 2

4k

The numerator is

k

E [sfsg^C-i)*'' - s££ } Sf ] (m + 1 + *)W.

(37)

(38)

The expression is divisible by 2m + 1 + z once. To see this, note that (|38])
is a sum of terms each proportional to (m + 1 + z)i~ l — (— l)* +3 'm J ' - * for
some j > z. This is zero for 1 + z = —2m. This is why it is convenient to
consider an extra puncture in the correlation function as compared to (]30f) .
The correlation function is then

• a'

-l fe 2

fco-2fc+6

71

r 2fc - 2 -i(jfc-l)(4ib 2 -2ife-3)z 2fc - 4
3

(A; - 1)(A; - 2)
90

80fc 4 - 144A; 3 - 152A; 2 + 132k + 10b) z

■Ik-

log Z

1 a'

(39)

up to genus two. In terms of r\:
(_l)^2- fc + 2

71

-P

p/2-1

1

12'

(p-2) [p 2 -p-

15

T

(p-2)(p-4)
23040

80p 4 - 288p 3 - 728p 2 + 1176p + 2085)//

_p/2-2

p/2-3

log?]

p 2 — 4/c 2

(40)

at a' = 1. This is the final answer for the tachyon two-point function in
the Euclidean black hole to genus two and the most important result of the
paper. Expressions with fewer or more punctures are easily obtained by
integrating or taking derivatives with respect to the z in the denominator
of (37) and then reexpanding in 1/rj. The method I have used produces the
collective field theory part of the amplitude unambiguously. However, the

11

only information it gives about the factorized external legs is where the poles
are. This is so because it is valid only for the discrete tachyons which are
sitting right on the poles. In the undeformed case of the formula, (|5BD, k may
be a half- integer, in the black-hole case of fl40|), only integers are allowed. It
would therefore be desirable to redo the calculation using the method of [§].
I hope to return to this issue in the future.

6 Conclusions

As indicated in this paper, correlation functions in the 1/x 2 deformed matrix
model are easily calculated using methods similar to the ones used for the
standard c = 1 matrix model. The results are different, but with a similar
structure. It is also interesting to note that there is a restriction on possible
naked singularities: they can not be of arbitrary negative mass.

An important task that remains is an explicit derivation of the black hole
from the modified matrix model. In the standard c = 1 such a derivation
exists, i.e. the loop operator construction, where the Liouville mode is clearly
identified in the matrix model. Such a construction is necessary also for the

black hole if the identification proposed in |IT] is to be established.

It is important to realize that the 1/x 2 deformed model is a candidate
for an eternal black hole. As such it may not have much to say about the
information problem, which is best discussed in the context of forming and
evaporating black holes. On the other hand, with a matrix-model black hole
at hand, even if it is eternal, we might learn to recognize matrix-model black
holes in general. This should help us towards a full understanding of what
matrix models, i.e. string theory, have to tell us about black holes.

Acknowledgements

I would like to thank David Gross for discussions.

References

[1] C.G. Callan, S.B. Giddings, J. A. Harvey and A. Strominger, Phys. Rev.
D45 (1992) R1005.

12

[2] J. A.Harvey and A. Strominger, "Quantum Aspects of Black Holes",
Chigago preprint EFI-92-41, hepth/9209055.

[3] S.B. Giddings and A. Strominger, "Quantum Theories of Dilaton Grav-
ity", Santa Barbara preprint UCSBTH-92-28, hepth/9207034.

[4] E. Witten, Phys. Rev. D44 (1991) 314.

[5] G. Moore, Nucl. Phys. B368 (1992) 557.

[6] G. Moore and N. Seiberg, Int. J. Mod. Phys. A7 (1992) 2601.

[7] Z. Yang, "A Possible Black Hole Background in c = 1 Mtarix Model",
Rochester preprint UR-1251, ER-13065-701, hepth/9202078.

[8] J.G. Russo, Phys. Lett. B300 (1993) 336.

[9] A. Dhar, G. Mandal and S. Wadia, Mod. Phys. Lett. A7 (1992) 3703.
[10] S. Das, Mod. Phys. Lett. A8 (1993) 69.

[11] A. Jevicki and T. Yoneya, "A Deformed Matrix Model and the Black
Hole Background in Two-Dimensional String Theory", Brown preprint
BROWN-HEP-904, hepth/9305109.

[12] D.J. Gross, I.R. Klebanov and M.J. Newman, Nucl. Phys. B350 (1990)
621.

[13] U.H. Danielsson and D.J. Gross, Nucl. Phys. B366 (1991) 3.
[14] U.H. Danielsson, Nucl. Phys. B380 (1992) 83.

[15] N. Seiberg, "Notes on Quantum Liouville Theory and Quantum Grav-
ity" , Rutgers University preprint RU-90-29.

[16] N. Seiberg and S. Shenker, Phys. Rev. D45 (1992) 4581.

[17] M. Bershadsky, D. Kutasov, Phys. Lett. B266 (1991) 345.

[18] E. Witten, Nucl. Phys. B373 (1992) 187.

[19] U.H. Danielsson, "A Study of Two-Dimensional String Theory", Ph.D.
Thesis, Princeton, 1992, hepth/9205063.

13

[20] J. Distler and P. Nelson, Nucl. Phys. B374 (1992) 123.

[21] R. Dijkgraaf, E. Verlinde and H. Verlinde, Nucl. Phys. B371 (1992) 370.

[22] E. Fahri and S. Gutman, Int. J. Mod. Phys. A5 (1990) 3029.

[23] D.J. Gross and N. Miljkovic, Phys. Lett. 238B (1990) 217.

[24] M. Abramowitz and LA. Stegun, "Handbook of Mathematical Func-
tions", National Bureau of Standards, Washington, D.C., 1964.

14